Allowed

Canara Bank v. Sri. Maruthi Sidram Aski

DRT6 Mar 2026OA/313/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant's Original Application for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. The defendants appeared ex parte. The Court admitted the claim of Rs. 86,47,694.80 and reduced the interest rate to 6.00% p.a. (simple) given the agricultural purpose of the loan.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 86,47,694.80 with interest at 6.00% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing, recoverable personally and against schedule property.

Canara Bank versus Sri. Maruthi Sidram Aski — Specific Performance | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 6^th Day of March, 2026

¶3

Present: Sri. T. RAJESH Presiding Officer

¶4

OA. No.313/2025

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Canara Bank Raibag Branch, Sankalp Building, Ankali Road, Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Dist., Through its Chief Manager Mr. Sivakumar A … APPLICANT

¶7

AND:

¶8

Sri. Maruthi Sidram Aski S/o. Sidram Aski, Aged about 30 years, R/o. Morab Village, Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Distr., Karnataka-591317

¶9

Sri. Laxman Nandani S/o. Rama Nandani, Aged about 47 years, R/o. Morab Village, Raibag Taluk, Belgaum Dist., Karnataka-591317 ...DEFENDANTS

¶10

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶11

Applicant : M/s. V S Associates Defendants : Exparte

¶12

:FINAL ORDER:

¶13

The present Original Application in short (OA) has been filed

¶14

OA. No.313/2025

¶15

¶16

under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for Rs.86,47,694.80 (Rupees Eighty Six Lakh Forty Seven Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Four and Eighty Paisa only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the Defendants.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that, the defendants availed credit facilities of Rs.40,00,000/and Rs.15,00,000/on 27.03.2017 towards agricultural purposes.

¶18

It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed credit facilities, the defendants executed necessary loan documents. Apart from the creation of security interest by way of mortgage over the Schedule property.

¶19

It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facilities, agreeing to service the loan amount promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in default in repayment and consequentially turning the loan account as NPA.

¶20

In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

¶21

OA. No.313/2025

¶22

¶23

Despite, service of summons on the defendants, they failed to appear, resulting the defendants being set exparte on 13.10.2025.

¶24

The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A12 and got the same marked in evidence.

¶25

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit.

¶26

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter:

¶27

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendants?

¶28

ii) What order are to be passed?

¶29

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶30

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application

¶31

remains unrebutted as defendants remained exparte. The

¶32

evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facilities

¶33

OA. No.313/2025

¶34

¶35

as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendants and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

¶36

Hence in view of the above findings which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

¶37

Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities were availed for agricultural purpose and also that OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal in view of the OA can be allowed with a reduced interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple).

¶38

In the result, OA.No.313/2025 stands allowed,

¶39

i) The applicant is allowed to recovery an aggregate sum

¶40

of Rs.86,47,694.80 (Rupees Eighty Six Lakh Forty Seven

¶41

Thousand Six Hundred Ninety Four and Eighty Paisa only) with further interest of 6.00% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA

¶42

OA. No.313/2025

¶43

¶44

till the realization from the defendants, after giving credit to all the

¶45

amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA

¶46

and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against defendants jointly, severally and personally and also by proceeding against the schedule property. The schedule property to the OA be the schedule property to the Recovery Certificate.

¶47

ii) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendants jointly, severally and personally and their other assets are liable for all such amounts due under the loan account.

¶48

iii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding

¶49

which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

¶50

iv) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this

¶51

order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

¶52

v) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with this Final Order.

¶53

OA. No.313/2025

¶54

¶55

14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned

¶56

in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of

¶57

DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶58

[Dictated to the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 6^th Day of March 2026].

¶59

Sd/(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶60

ANNEXURES

¶61

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶62

AW-1: Manager of the applicant bank.

¶63

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶64

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit Number
1	Simple mortgage deed dated 20.03.2017	A1
2	Loan application dated 20.03.2017	A2
3	Sanction letter dated 27.03.2017	A3
4	Agreement for agricultural advances dated 27.03.2017	A4
5	Deed of Guarantee dated 27.03.2017	A5
6	Sanction letter 27.03.2017	A6
7	Agreement for Agricultural advances dated 20.05.2017	A7
8	Deed of Guarantee dated 20.05.2017	A8
9	Letter of Revival dated 26.03.2020 and 25.06.2022	A9
10	Legal notice dated 25.02.2023	A10

¶65

OA. No.313/2025

¶66

11	True extract of statement pertaining to the defendant’s No.05088210003012	of loan	accounts accounts	A11
12	True extract of statement pertaining to the defendant’s No.05088010035029	of loan	account accounts	A12
13	Certificate under Section 2a of evidence act, 1891	bank	er’s book	-

¶67

Sd/-

¶68

(T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Sri. Maruthi Sidram Aski

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Sri. Maruthi Sidram Aski

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Icici Bank Limited versus Joginder Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Pritpal Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Sh. Abhay Pundeer

Hdfc Bank versus Dinesh Kumar

Bank of India versus Sh Atma Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Satnam Singh